论刑事裁判规则的建构

发布时间：2018-06-23 17:34

本文选题：刑事裁判规则 + 事实判断　；参考：《山东大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：目前,学术界和审判实务界对裁判规则进行研究的专门著作很少,对裁判规则的界定也很不统一,存在分歧。本文在现有研究的基础上,并在与其它相似概念相辨析的情况下,认为刑事裁判规则是指在具体的刑事审判活动中,由法官根据特定的案件事实对刑法文本规范进行建构而形成的适用于具体刑事个案的规则。在刑事案件的审理过程中,法官最主要的任务便是建构适合该案的刑事裁判规则,这就要求法官应当展示该裁判规则的建构过程与建构方法。因此研究刑事裁判规则的建构具有重要的意义和现实必要性。首先,研究刑事裁判规则的构建有助于增强判决结论的说服力。法官如果能在裁判文书中展示自己建构刑事裁判规则的思维过程,解释出自己为什么在法律的海洋中发现适用的法律,如何在发现的刑法条文和案件事实之间搭建起一座桥梁,从而增强判决结论的说服力,排除受众对法律适用的疑惑；其次,研究刑事裁判规则的建构有助于法官了解自身的裁判思维,提高司法认知水平。这样就可以提高自己的元认知水平,而如果我们能够了解自身的思维运作,就有助于纠正自身裁判过程中存在的问题,提高裁判质量；最后,研究刑事裁判规则的构建有助于法官形成正确的判断,发现判决错误的根源。让法官明确自己所建构出的刑事裁判规则究竟来自什么,是怎么作出的,可以有针对性地对每一个环节一一进行查验,做到心中有数,从而发现错误的根源。而对于刑事裁判规则的具体建构过程来说,学术界和审判实务界的研究更是少之又少。有学者认为对于简单案件来说,法官所发现的相关法律规则即是裁判规则,对于复杂的刑事案件,才需要法官去建构适合个案的刑事裁判规则。也有学者认为刑事裁判规则的建构需要法官充分发挥主观能动性,反复往返于刑法规范与案件事实之间,使刑法规范与案件实相互作用，并对二者反复进行校验,运用理性知识和经验智慧建构出真正适合刑事案件的裁判规则。而对于如何建构刑事裁判规则,这是本文的写作重点。本文借助信息加工的研究思路,将其建构路径分为三个阶段：输入、加工和输出。事实判断部分是刑事裁判规则的输入阶段。这一步将几种事实进行了梳理,并对各环节如何认定进行了细致描述；法的发现阶段是刑事裁判规则的初步加工阶段。法官带着法感找法,判断哪个规范具有最近适合性,同时提出了法官从事法的发现的启发模式,以及具体刑法规范的发现过程；法官对所发现的刑法规范进行解释是刑事裁判规则的深层加工阶段。这里的法官解释一词是属技术层面,方法论意义上的,并不是体制意义上的,是法官判案不可或缺的思维活动,具有正当性。并列举几种具体的解释方法,主要是为了说明刑事裁判规则建构的思维过程,并不重点论述解释方法自身,故仅选几个并结合案例进行探讨。在进行完上述环节后,法官即自然而然的最终得出了案件的判决标准---刑事裁判规则。
[Abstract]:At present, there are few specialized works in the academic circles and the judicial practice circles to study the rules of the referee, and the definition of the rules of refereeing is not uniform and disagreement. On the basis of the existing research, this article considers that the criminal judgment rule refers to the judge in the specific criminal trial activities. The rules of specific criminal facts are applied to specific criminal cases formed by the construction of the norms of criminal law.
In the process of hearing the criminal case, the main task of the judge is to construct the criminal judgment rules suitable for the case, which requires the judge to display the construction process and construction method of the rules. Therefore, it is of great significance and practical necessity to study the construction of the rules of criminal judgment. First, the study of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment. It helps to enhance the persuasiveness of the conclusion of the judgment. If the judge can show the process of thinking of the rules of the criminal judgment in the referee's document, explain why he found the applicable law in the ocean of the law, how to build a bridge between the criminal provisions and the facts of the case, so as to enhance the persuasion of the conclusion of the judgment. To eliminate the doubts about the application of the law by the audience; secondly, the study of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment helps the judges to understand their own judgment and improve the level of judicial cognition. In this way, they can improve their metacognitive level, and if we can understand their own thinking operation, it will help to correct the questions that exist in the process of self refereeing. In the end, the construction of the rules of the criminal judgment will help the judge to form the correct judgment and find the root of the error of the judgment. To find the root of the mistake.
As for the concrete construction process of the rules of criminal judgment, there are few studies in the academic circle and the judicial practice circle. Some scholars believe that for simple cases, the relevant legal rules found by the judges are the rules of refereeing. For the complex criminal cases, the law officials need to construct the criminal judgment rules suitable for the case. Scholars believe that the construction of the rules of criminal judgment requires the judge to give full play to the subjective initiative, repeat and return to the norms of criminal law and the facts of the case, make the criminal code and case real interaction, and check the two parties repeatedly, and use rational knowledge and experience wisdom to construct the rules of referee which is really suitable for criminal cases.
With the help of the research ideas of information processing, this paper divides its construction path into three stages: input, processing and output. The fact judgment part is the input stage of the rules of criminal judgment. This step is to sort out several facts and how to identify each link. A detailed description; the discovery stage of the law is the preliminary processing stage of the rules of the criminal judgment. The judge takes the law to find the law, and judges which norm has the most recent suitability. At the same time, it puts forward the enlightening mode of the discovery of the judge engaged in the law and the discovery process of the specific criminal code; the judge's interpretation of the criminal code of the criminal law is a criminal discretion. In the deep processing stage of the rule of judgment, the judge's interpretation of a word is a technical level, and it is not in the sense of the system in the sense of the system. It is an indispensable thinking activity of the judge's judgment and is justified. It also lists several specific methods of interpretation, mainly to explain the thinking process of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment, and not to focus on the theory. The interpretation of the method itself, so only a few and combined with case study. After the completion of the above link, the judge will naturally finally get the judgment standard of the case - the rule of criminal judgment.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926.2;D925.2

【参考文献】